C ASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS N ATIONAL MONUMENT H ISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY

Transcription

1

2 C ASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS N ATIONAL MONUMENT H ISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY March 1997 Jennifer D. Brown National Park Service Southeast Region Atlanta, Georgia

3 CONTENTS Figure Credits iv List of Figures V Foreword vii Chapter One: Introduction 1 Chapter Two: The Struggle for Florida and Construction of Castillo de San Marcos, Associated Properties Registration Requirements/Integrity Contributing Properties Noncontributing Properties Chapter Three: The United States War Department at Fort Marion, Associated Properties 32 Registration Requirements/Integrity 34 Contributing Properties 35 Noncontributing Properties 35 Chapter Four: Management Recommendations 37 Bibliography 39 Appendix A: Descriptions of Historic Resources A-l Appendix B: Historical Base Map B-l Appendix C: National Register Documentation C-l III

4 FIGURE CREDITS Cover, clockwise from top left: Water Battery and City Gate, William Chapman for National Park Service, and aerial view of Castillo, Castillo de San Marcos National Monument archives p. 2: William Chapman for National Park Service; p. 8,9: Florida State Photographic Archives; p. 11: Christopher Duffy, The Fortress in The Age of Vauban and Frederick the Great, , p. 12,14: Castillo de San Marcos National Monument archives, p. 15: Jennifer D. Brown and Jill K. Hanson for National Park Service; p. 17: William Chapman for National Park Service; p. 24, Castillo de San Marcos National Monument archives; p. 26: William Chapman for National Park Service; p. 27: Jennifer D. Brown and Jill K Hanson for National Park Service, and William Chapman for National Park Service; p. 29,30: Castillo de San Marcos National Monument archives; p. 31, William Chapman for National Park Service; p. 32: Jennifer D. Brown and Jill K. Hanson for National Park Service. iv

5 FIGURES Figure 1. Location of Castillo de San Marcos National Monument 2 Figure 2. Pedro Menéndez de Avilés 8 Figure 3. Plan of St. Augustine, Figure 4. Plan of a simple bastioned fort 11 Figure 5. Plan of Castillo, Figure 6. Plan of Castillo, Figure 7. Ravelin viewed from west, Figure 8. Reconstructed Cubo Line viewed from northwest, Figure 9. City Gate viewed from northwest, Figure 10. Plan of Castillo, 1821 Figure 11. View of seawall from south, 1991 Figure 12. View of hot shot furnace from south, 1995 Figure 13. View of water battery from south, 1991 Figure 14. Fort Marion courtyard, c Figure 15. Native American prisoners at Fort Marion, date unknown Figure 16. View of moat and east wall from south, 1991 Figure 17. View of moat, covered way, and glacis from east, v

6 Foreword We are pleased to make available this historic resource study, part of our ongoing effort to provide comprehensive documentation for all the historic structures and landscapes of National Park Service units in the Southeast Region. Following a field survey of park resources and extensive research, the project team updated the park s List of Classified Structures, developed historic contexts, and prepared new National Register of Historic Places documentation. Many individuals and institutions contributed to the successful completion of this work. We would particularly like to thank Castillo de San Marcos Superintendent Gordon Wilson, Chief of Administration Bob Fliegel, Archivist Clara Gualtieri, and retired park historian Luis Arana, for their assistance. We hope that this study will prove valuable to park management and others in understanding and interpreting the historical significance of the park s cultural resources. Kirk A. Cordell Assistant Superintendent, Cultural Resources Southeast Support Offtce March 1997 vii

7 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Castillo de San Marcos National Monument in St. Augustine, Florida, contains the oldest remaining European fortification in the United States. Built more than one hundred years after the founding of St. Augustine by the Spanish in 1565, the Castillo stands as a reminder of a century of conflict between the European powers for control of North America. Its bastioned design also represents the conventions of military architecture and technology of its day. The Castillo additionally illustrates the waning power of Spain in the Southeast, principally after the United States won its sovereignty. The long history of Castillo de San Marcos and its distinctive character and architecture attest to the significance of the monument to the story of the United States and the building of a nation. DESCRIPTION OF CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT Castillo de San Marcos National Monument comprises approximately acres in St. Augustine, St. Johns County, Florida. The park lies north of St. Augustine s central plaza and fronts Matanzas Bay. Built as the northernmost Spanish stronghold in the southeastern United States and as a defense against pirate attacks on St. Augustine, the Castillo was originally located at the northern edge of the city, where it commanded the land and sea routes into the settlement. Today, colonial St. Augustine extends south of the monument, while the modern city has grown around this core in all directions. The city of St. Augustine lies on the eastern coastal plain of Florida. It is a low-lying, sandy area protected from the sea by a number of barrier islands. The San Sebastian River runs west of the city and formed a natural boundary for the colony early in its history. A seawall and water battery separate Castillo de San Marcos from the waters of Matanzas Bay on the fort s east side. The site of the Castillo is a rolling, grassy area sprinkled with a few trees. The outer portions of the grounds are flat up to the glacis, which slopes upward toward the fort and roughly follows the contour of the moat and covered way. The park area is irregular in shape, with much of its western boundary following the contour of State Road A-l-A. West of the fort, beginning at the bottom of the glacis near the northwest bastion, is the reconstructed Cubo Line. The defense work runs west from the glacis to the City Gate, interrupted by State Road A-1-A just east of the gate.

8 2 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY Figure I. Location of Castillo de San Marcos National Monument

9 INTRODUCTION 3 The Spanish founded St. Augustine in 1565 and, following an English pirate raid on the city in 1668, began construction of Castillo de San Marcos in The Castillo had been completed for less than a hundred years, however, when Florida became a diplomatic pawn. Control of Florida passed to the English in 1763, only to revert to the Spanish twenty-one years later. Finally, in 1821, Spain agreed to a treaty that transferred ownership of Florida to the United States, and Florida became an American territory. The United States War Department administered the Castillo, renamed Fort Marion, for more than a century. During the early years, troops garrisoned in St. Augustine stored supplies at the fort. The building also housed prisoners of war from a number of conflicts with Native American groups during the nineteenth century. After the Civil War, Fort Marion was no longer necessary to national defense, and although it remained an active fortification in name, the Castillo was regarded as a historic relic by the military. In 1915 the War Department entered into an agreement with the St. Augustine Historical Society to provide guide service to the public. The Castillo was declared a national monument in 1924, and in 1933 its administration passed from the War Department to the National Park Service. The historic resources at Castillo de San Marcos National Monument include the Castillo, moat, covered way, glacis, ravelin, City Gate, reconstructed Cubo Line, water battery, seawall, and hot shot furnace. The Castillo, moat, covered way, glacis, ravelin, and Cubo Line date from the First Spanish Period, while the City Gate dates from the Second Spanish Period. The water battery, seawall, and hot shot furnace date from the War Department era. The park interprets all of the structures as part of the evolution of the defenses of St. Augustine during the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The St. Augustine National Landmark District exists near Castillo de San Marcos National Monument; its resources illustrate the growth of the city which the fort was built to protect. SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY The Historic Resource Study (HRS) identifies and evaluates, using National Register criteria, the historic properties within the national monument. The study establishes and documents historic contexts associated with the park and evaluates the extent to which the surviving historic resources represent those contexts. The completed HRS will serve as a tool for future site planning, resource management, and the continuing development of interpretive programs at the monument. CastilIo de San Marcos National Monument has been the subject of numerous investigations undertaken by the National Park Service, including historic structure reports, archeological investigations, and detailed studies of the fort s history. This report utilizes previous research to evaluate the park s resources through the development of historic contexts. This HRS and associated survey documentation will provide park management with information on historic structures, an interpretive framework for the park, and updated National Register documentation.

10 4 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONALMONUMENT:HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY Castillo de San Marcos National Monument was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1966 with the passage of the National Historic Preservation Act. The Keeper of the Register accepted the nomination of the park as a historic district in March This documentation named the Castillo, City Gate, and water battery as contributing structures. The contexts developed in this study will be used to supplement the original documentation and support the addition of the moat, covered way, glacis, ravelin, Cubo Line, seawall, and hot shot furnace as contributing properties within the district. SUM MARY OF IDENTIFICATI ON AND EVALUATION METHODS Survey Methodology Goals of the historic resource survey of the Park are to 1) update the List of Classified Structures (LCS) database for the Park for use by park management; 2) prepare a Historic Resource Study for the Park; 3) update the Park s National Register of Historic Places documentation; and 4) assemble a comprehensive survey of structures consisting of a photographic record for each structure built prior to 1950 and considered eligible for listing in the National Register. This will be used in complying with Sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act of The initial survey of Castillo de San Marcos was completed under a cooperative agreement with the University of Georgia Research Foundation. The survey, led by Principal Investigator William Chapman, concentrated on four structures within park boundaries, the Castillo, water battery, City Gate, and reconstructed Cubo Line, and one structure located outside park boundaries, the Orange Street Annex. Denise Larimore prepared a draft Historic Resource Study based on the survey work and additional research. In November 1995, Jennifer D. Brown and Jill K. Hanson, working under the direction of the National Park Service Southeast Field Area, revisited the Park and surveyed six additional structures, the ravelin, moat, covered way, glacis, hot shot furnace, and Tricentennial Marker. Brown wrote the current Historic Resource Study based on the Larimore text and further research and documentation. Determination of Historic Contexts This study evaluates the historic integrity and assesses the eligibility of the park s historic resources within two historic contexts. These contexts correspond to historic themes identified by the National Park Service in its revised thematic framework and by the Florida State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). The Florida SHPO has identified thirty-five distinct historic contexts for Florida history, many of which relate to the resources at Castillo de San Marcos National Monument. The following two historic contexts have been developed for the current study: 1) The Struggle for Florida and Construction of Castillo de San Marcos, ; and 2) The United States War Department at Fort Marion,

11 INTRODUCTION 5 The first context, The Struggle for Florida and Construction of Castillo de San Marcos, 1565-l821, relates to the NPS themes Peopling Places, Shaping the Political Landscape, and Changing Role of the United States in the World Community. The context also relates to several aspects of Florida history, including, First Spanish, , British, , and Second Spanish, This context considers the early history of Florida and the events that led the Spanish government to build the Castillo in St. Augustine. It also briefly examines the Castillo as a typical defensive fortification for its time. The context further discusses the turbulent eighteenth century in Florida, during which possession of the Castillo was lost and later regained by the Spanish. The second context, The United States War Department at Fort Marion, , relates to the NPS themes Shaping the Political Landscape and Changing Role of the United States in the World Community. The context also relates to the Florida SHPO s chronological contexts of the American period in Florida. In 1821 Spain agreed to cede Florida to the United States, and the Castillo became property of the War Department, This context chronicles the history of Fort Marion, as it was called, throughout the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, first as part of the American coastal defense system and later as the focus of early preservation efforts in St. Augustine. It ends with the transfer of the Castillo from the War Department to the National Park Service in Historic resources within the park represent three periods of significance. The First Spanish Period, , includes the initial settlement of Florida by the Spanish; this period is represented by Castillo de San Marcos and the moat, covered way, glacis, and ravelin. The Second Spanish Period witnessed the construction of the City Gate and Cubo Line as reinforcing elements of the Castillo s defense. This period encompasses the second occupation of Florida by the Spanish from Finally, the seawall, hot shot furnace, and water battery represent the War Department period of the Castillo s history, , when the United States government administered the fort through that executive agency. HISTORICAL BASE MAP DISCUSSION The historical base map (Appendix B) depicts the existing historic resources within the park that are documented in this study. The map shows the Park boundaries, nearby bodies of water, and major area highways. National Park Service maps prepared by the Denver Service Center for the Park s General Management Plan served as the basis for the maps included in this study. The historical base map does not attempt to depict a historic scene or identify nonextant historic structures.

12 CHAPTER TWO: THE STRUGGLE FOR FLORIDA AND CONSTRUCTION OF CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS, EXPLORATION IN FLORIDA AND THE FOUNDING OF ST.AUGUSTINE The history of Castillo de San Marcos begins with the earliest European exploration in the New World. In the century following the initial voyage of Christopher Columbus to the Caribbean in 1492, Spanish conquistadores carved out a vast and wealthy overseas empire for Spain that encompassed many of the Caribbean islands and the mainlands of Mexico, Central America, Colombia, Venezuela, and Peru. Juan Ponce de León discovered the Florida peninsula in 1513, claiming the North American continent for Spain. Ponce de León also discovered a significant water current crucial to the success of Spanish empire the Gulf Stream. Leaving the Caribbean by way of the Bahama Channel, Spanish galleons carrying the riches of the Americas utilized the natural flow of the Gulf Stream to propel them along the Florida coast and across the Atlantic. As a result, Florida assumed a great deal of strategic significance: if Spain did not control Florida, pirates would use its harbors as a base from which to attack the treasure fleets. 2 A number of attempts to settle Florida followed Ponce s discovery, but their costly failures led the Spanish king, Philip II, to forbid any further efforts at colonizing the region in The monarch revoked his order three years later, however, as word arrived in Spain of the newly established French settlement, Fort Caroline, on the St. Johns River in northeast Florida. In an effort to protect Spanish interests in the New World, Philip commissioned Pedro Menéndez de 3 Avilés to remove the French from Florida and colonize the area for Spain. Menédez arrived on the coast of Florida in 1565, landing first at Cape Canaveral before travelling north to the sheltered harbor of the land he named San Agustin. Hastily erecting fortifications around the big house given to the Spaniards by the Timucua Indian Chief Seloy, Menéndez and his men prepared to defend Spanish claims to Florida. An attack on Fort Caroline 1 George B. Tindall and David E. Shi, America: A Narrative History, 2d ed. (New York: W. W. Norton and co., 1989), Verne E. Chatelain, The Defenses of Spanish Florida (Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 194l), Ibid

13 8 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT:HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY while the French fleet was at sea eliminated most of the settlers; the sailors later met their demise when their ships wrecked, leaving them at the mercy of the Spanish. Most of the men, including their leader Jean Ribault, were killed at the direction of Menéndez. Within two months of landing in Florida, Menéndez had reclaimed the vast territory comprising most of North America for the Spanish king. 4 THEFIRSTCENTURY INST. AUGUSTINE The Spanish settlers remained in Seloy s village less than a year due to growing discord between the natives and the newcomers. The move out of the big house was the first of several within a small area around Matanzas Bay that would eventually lead them to the site of present-day St. Augustine. During the first century of the Florida settlement, the Spanish Figure 2. Pedro Menéndez de Avilés built nine different wooden forts for the defense of the colony. Each of these had a short life span due to the ill effects of time, weather, and insects on the structures. Enemy attacks destroyed the forts that were not eliminated by natural forces. 5 The likelihood of attack and the shortage of food and supplies most threatened the safety and stability of the colony. Settlers made few attempts to farm the land around St. Augustine because of poor soil conditions and the threat of Indian attack on those who ventured too far from the settlement. Except for produce raised in small plots around the houses, all of the colony s food, clothing, and other necessities came from Mexico and Habana, Cuba. Because supply shipments were often detained in Mexico and occasionally lost at sea, the residents of St. Augustine were often hungry and poorly clothed. 6 The threat of enemy raids on the town was always present, both from neighboring Native American tribes angered by Spanish activities and from other European nations covetous of Spain s New World riches. The English in particular threatened Spanish control of the Florida coast due to the success of privateers like Sir Francis Drake. In 1586, Drake led an expedition against the Spanish at St. Augustine and took the city with relative ease, burning the wooden 4 Albert Manucy, Florida s Menéndez: Captain General of the Ocean Sea (St. Augustine: St. Augustine Historical Society, 1965), Chatelain, 41: Luis Arana and Albert Manucy, The Building of Castillo de San Marcos (Eastern National Park and Monument Association, 1977), Chatelain, 9

14 THE STRUGGLE FOR FLORIDA AND CONSTRUCTION OF CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS fort, houses, and other buildings. 7 Thomas Cates, an English sailor who accompanied Drake during the assault, described the fort at that time, named San Juan de Pinos: When the day appeared we found it built all of timber, the walles being none other but whole Mastes or bodies of trees set vpright and close together in manner of a pale, without any ditch as yet made, but wholy intended with some more time; for they had not as yet finished al their work, having begunne the same some three or foure moneths before: so as, to say the trueth, they had no reason to keepe it, being subject both to fire, and easie assault. 8 Cates s description illustrates the appearance of this early precursor to Castillo de San Marcos and the vulnerability of wood forts to enemy attack. Despite the inadequacies of the wooden forts erected in St. Augustine, the Spanish continued to build and repair these structures, largely because they did not have the money to construct a masonry fortification. The attack of the pirate John Davis in 1668 provided the stimulus for the construction of a masonry fortress, however. Davis and his men captured a Spanish supply ship from Havana headed to St. Augustine and sailed into the city without raising suspicion among the townspeople. His attack under cover of night revealed once again the vulnerability of the colony and the inadequacy of its defenses. Fear that the pirates would return to claim the city, which they had Figure 3. Plan of St. Augustine, 1660 not destroyed, led the colonial governor to request aid from officials in Spain and Mexico. The Spanish queen approved the proposal for construction of a masonry fortress at St. Augustine, and in 1672 the first stone was laid for Castillo de San Marcos 9 7 Amy Bushnell, The Noble and Loyal City, , in The Oldest City: St. Augustine, Saga of Survival, ed. Jean Parker Waterbury (St. Augustine: St. Augustine Historical Society, 1983), Albert Manucy, ed., A History of Castillo de San Marcos and Fort Matanzas from Contemporary Narratives and Letters (Washington, DC: National Park Service, 1943), 8. 9 Arana and Manucy, 7-9.

15 10 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY SEVENTEENTH CENTURY MILITARY FORTRESSES Seventeenth century military engineering conventions dictated the design of Castillo de San Marcos. The introduction of cannon as an implement of war late in the Middle Ages rendered the castle useless as a form of defense and forced military engineers to develop a new type of fortress able to withstand the force of cannon bombardment on its walls. The Italians first developed the bastion system, which quickly spread across Europe and, by the seventeenth century, dominated fortress design. European nations not only utilized bastioned fortresses at home but also built fortifications in their colonial outposts in the same manner, altering designs to suit local conditions and materials. Thus the Spanish officials in St. Augustine adopted the bastion system for the early wood forts and, later, for the stone fortress, Castillo de San Marcos. l0 The bastion system evolved out of the medieval castle form. Engineers lowered castle walls and placed mounds of earth in front of them, creating ramparts able to withstand cannon bombardment. Moats remained an integral part of the defenses to prevent enemy forces from scaling the sloped embankments and entering the fort. The circular castle tower evolved into the angular bastion, which afforded protection to adjacent walls. Beyond the fortress walls engineers placed a variety of masonry and earthen outer works that strengthened the fort s defenses. 11 Bastioned forts centered on a plaza, around which the massive ramparts stood. The interior of the ramparts sloped upward toward the fighting platform, called the terreplein. The banquette, or firing step, rose above the terreplein and was protected by the parapet. Soldiers fired on the enemy through embrasures (openings) in the parapet. On the exterior of the rampart, facing the moat, a masonry scarp retained the earthen wall of the rampart. The opposite side of the moat also had a masonry retaining wall, the counterscarp, above which stood the covered way. A palisade protected the banquette for the covered way. The glacis, an earthen bank kept clear of vegetation, sloped downward from the covered way into open country. 12 Seventeenth century forts were most often square in shape; the linear curtain walls projected outward at the corners into diamond-shaped bastions, from which soldiers could view the surrounding area in all directions. Ravelins were similarly shaped defensive structures, often built in front of curtain walls to provide additional support to the points of the bastions, which were most vulnerable to attack. Finally, outer defense works like counterguards and hornworks, built of earth and wood and placed in front of the fort s main body, provided additional strength to the 10 Luis Arana, The First Spanish Period, : The Endurance of Castillo de San Marcos, in Historic Structure Report: Castillo de San Marcos National Monument, C. Craig Frazier, Randall Copeland, and Luis Arana (National Park Service, 1986), 9-10; Chatelain, John Muller, A Treatise Containing the Elementary, Part of Fortification, Regular and Irregular (1746: reprint, Ottawa: Museum Restoration Service, 1968), 2l Christopher Duffy, The Fortress in the Age of Vauban and Frederick the Great, , vol. 2 of Siege Warfare (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1985), 2.

16 THE STRUGGLE FOR FLORIDA AND CONSTRUCTION OF CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS, Figure 4. Plan of a simple bastioned fort fortress and allowed the defenders to move farther into the landscape against the enemy. As a complete defensive fortification, the bastioned fort and its outer defenses provided a great deal of security to its occupants during a siege, although a persistent enemy might breach the walls given sufficient time and manpower. 13 CONSTRUCTIONOF THECASTILLO In 1669 Queen Regent Mariana of Spain approved the construction of a masonry fortress in St. Augustine and sent the colony s newly appointed governor, Manuel de Cendoya, to Mexico to obtain the necessary funds. Cendoya arrived in St. Augustine in 1671, after stopping in Havana to recruit masons, stonecutters, and lime burners to aid in construction. In Cuba he also acquired the services of Ignacio Daza, an engineer, and Lorenzo Lajones, the master of construction. 14 Daza was an experienced military engineer familiar with contemporary fortification designs. After examining possible locations for the fort, Daza and the military council in St. Augustine determined that the site of the existing fortress, at the northern edge of town, was most appropriate for the defense of St. Augustine. From this site, enemy fleets attempting to enter the 13 Ibid., Luis Arana, Governor Cendoya s Negotiation in Mexico for a Stone Fort in St. Augustine, El Escribano 7 (Oct. 1970):

17 12 CASTILLO DE SANMARCOSNATIONALMONUMENT:HISTORICRESOURCESTUDY harbor could be bombarded easily from the safety of the fort. The location was also advantageous for the protection of the colony from land attack from the north, 15 Preparations for construction began in 1671 as blacksmiths and carpenters made the necessary tools and implements for quarrying and transporting stone to the construction site. Coquina, a soft limestone made of cemented seashells, was locally available on Anastasia Island and provided an adequate material with which to build the fortress. Lime kilns were built in St. Augustine to convert oyster shells into lime for construction. On October 2, 1672, Cendoya and other royal officials broke ground for the foundation trench of the fort, and several weeks later the first stone was laid. 16 Local Indians, convicts, African- American slaves, and occasionally Spanish soldiers labored alongside the skilled workers imported from Cuba. Work progressed at a steady rate on the fortress, although funding shortages and disease epidemics occasionally slowed construction. By 1686, the main block of the Castillo was complete. At that time, the outer curtain walls and bastions of the fort were coquina, while the interior walls and roof were wood; the terreplein was made of tabby, a cement made of lime and seashells, laid on top of Figure 5. Plan of Castillo, 1675 wood planks. The fort housed troop quarters, a chapel, and a number of storerooms for the garrison. Ten years later, the moat and seawall were finished, thus enhancing the Castillo s defenses. 17 The War of Spanish Succession between England and Spain precipitated the first true test of St. Augustine s fortress. Governor James Moore of Carolina led an attack against St. Augustine in 1702, hoping to drive the Spanish out of Florida, gain control of the Bahama Channel for the English, and eliminate the threat of Spanish-French aggression against Charleston. When the English reached St. Augustine, they bypassed the Castillo and occupied the town; local residents fled to the fort for protection. The English besieged Castillo de San Marcos for fifty days, until four Spanish men-of-war arrived from Cuba with fresh supplies and 15 Chatelain, Arana, First Spanish Period, 6, Luis Arana, David C. Dutcher, George M. Strock, and F. Ross Holland, Castillo de San Marcos and Fort Malanzas National Monuments, Florida: Historical Research Management Plan (National Park Service, 1967), 8-9.

18 THE STRUGGLE FOR FLORIDA AND CONSTRUCTION OF CASTILLODE SAN MARCOS reinforcements. Weary from the long siege and unable to match the new Spanish force, Moore burned his ships, abandoned his supplies, and retreated overland to the St. Johns River. The British set the city afire as they left, and the Castillo was the only structure to survive. 18 Following Moore s attack on the Castillo and the total destruction of St. Augustine, the Spanish sought to strengthen the city s defenses by constructing a system of inner defense lines. Between 1706 and 1763, the Spanish built four earth and log defensive structures around the town. The Cubo Line formed the northern boundary of St. Augustine and, along with the Rosario Line to the west, created a line of circumvallation protecting the city s land approaches. The homwork and Fort Mose line were built north of the Cubo Line, between the North River on the east and the San Sebastian River on the west. These structures strengthened the town s defenses but proved difficult to maintain in the warm Florida climate. 19 Meanwhile, a new English threat from the north caused the Spanish to reassess the strength of the Castillo s defenses. General James Oglethorpe began settlements at Savannah in 1732 and at Fort Frederica in 1736, thus staking the English claim to an area traditionally considered part of Spanish Florida. As the English pressed south, Spanish Governor Manuel de Montiano realized that Castillo de San Marcos was inadequate for the defense of the colony, even with the addition of the outer defense works. An evaluation of the fort by Antonio de Arredondo, an engineer from Havana, found that the stone walls were in good shape, but the wood in the interior rooms and the terreplein was rotted through. 20 The governor wrote officials in Cuba regarding conditions in St. Augustine: Your Excellency must know that this castle, the only defense here, has no bombproofs for the protection of the garrison, that the counterscarp is too low, that there is no covered way, that the curtains are without demilunes, that there are no other exterior works to give them time for a long defense;... we are as bare outside as we are without life inside, for there are no guns that could last 24 hours and if there were, we have no artillerymen to serve them. 21 Following the governor s report, officials in Cuba sent soldiers, laborers, provisions, and money to St. Augustine, The Cuban governor authorized construction of masonry vaults within 18 Arana and Manucy, Chatelain, Arana and Manucy, Ibid., 43.

19 14 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT:HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY Figure 6. Plan of Castillo, 1763 the fortress walls and improved outer defense works. By 1739, the eight vaults along the east curtain wall were completed, increasing the total height of the wall five feet. The outbreak of war between England and Spain the same year slowed construction, however, and completion of the project was postponed until the end of the war. 22 The War of Jenkins Ear, as the conflict between England and Spain was known, provided Oglethorpe with an excuse to attack St. Augustine and oust the Spanish from Florida. Oglethorpe sailed south from Fort Frederica in 1740 and lay siege to the Castillo for thirty-eight days, but the onset of the hurricane season caused the English to abandon the effort and return home. Construction on the vaults resumed after the war and was completed between 1750 and Work also continued on the covered way and the glacis until funds ran out in In 1762 the Spanish undertook the last of their construction projects at the Castillo. Town residents volunteered their labor to enlarge the covered way by five feet, and masons constructed a six-foot-high stone parapet on top. Construction of the glacis was also completed at this time. Engineers determined that the original ravelin was inadequate to the defense of the fort s entrance; therefore, a new, larger ravelin, capable of housing five cannon and an underground powder magazine, was built by the end of the year Ibid., Ibid., Ibid., 52-53

20 THE STRUGGLE FOR FLORIDA AND CONSTRUCTION OF CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS Before the ravelin was completed, news arrived in St. Augustine of the Spanish cession of Florida to England under the terms of the treaty ending the Seven Years War, fought in America as the French and Indian War from 1754 to All work on the Castillo ceased as the Spanish prepared to evacuate the city. On July 21, 1763, the Spanish governor officially surrendered Castillo de San Marcos to England. Thus ended the occupation of St. Augustine by the Spanish, who chose to abandon the city altogether rather than suffer under British ru1e. 25 BRITISH OCCUPATION OF FORT ST.MARK The Spanish left behind a fortified town with approximately 400 residences and the nearly complete Figure 7. Ravelin viewed from west, 1995 Castillo de San Marcos, which the British renamed Fort St. Mark. The elimination of other European powers from the eastern coast of North America diminished the strategic significance of St. Augustine; therefore, the British undertook few alterations to the city s defenses during the first decade of occupation. 26 The outbreak of the American Revolution elevated the importance of St. Augustine to the English, however. A British garrison was headquartered in town, and a large number of British Loyalists from the southern colonies sought refuge within its walls. The small frontier outpost quickly became a thriving city. Fort St. Mark received needed repairs to its defenses during this time, including the reconstruction of the entrenchment and retrenchment lines north of the city. The fortress housed troops, weapons, and equipment for the army. Additionally, the British used the fort as a prison for rebel colonists. Hundreds of prisoners of war passed through St. Augustine before being moved elsewhere or exchanged for imprisoned British soldiers and 27 Loyalists. Although the Continental Congress entertained plans to invade East Florida in 1778, the British capture of Savannah late that year crushed those ambitions and ended rebel plots against St. Augustine. Even as the American threat to the colony diminished, a new threat to St. Augustine arose from the Spanish, who longed to regain a foothold in North America. Spain declared war on England in 1779 but never launched an attack against East Florida. 25 Ihird., Daniel L. Schafer,... Not So Gay a Town in America as This..., , in The Oldest City: St. Augustine, Saga of Survival, ed. Jean Parker Waterbury (St. Augustine: St. Augustine Historical Society, 1983), 91: Arana and Manucy, Albert Manucy and Alberta Johnson, Fort Marion and the War of Independence (St. Augustine: National Park Service, Southeastern National Monuments, 1941), 3-10.

21 16 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY Nevertheless, negotiations following the war returned Florida to Spain, and the brief British 28 occupation of St. Augustine ended in July SECOND SPANISH OCCUPATION OF CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS Most British citizens evacuated the colony with the military, although about 300 chose to remain and declare allegiance to Spain rather than give up their homes and plantations. The Spanish military escorted the new colonial government into St. Augustine, and the city was soon repopulated with a variety of immigrants, including, Spaniards, Englishmen, Americans, Minorcans, Italians, Greeks, Swiss, Germans, French, Canary Islanders, Scots, and Irish. A sizable population of free blacks, slaves, and Native Americans resided throughout the colony 29 as well. The new Spanish St. Augustine was not a tranquil city, however. Difficulties arising from dependence on Cuba and Mexico continued as they had in the First Spanish Period, leaving the town short on supplies and soldiers much of the year. Unrest along the Georgia border exacerbated the colonial government s problems. Runaway slaves from Georgia often sought refuge in Florida, particularly in the interior of the peninsula controlled by Seminole Indian tribes. As a result, Georgia plantation owners often crossed the border in search of fugitives, raiding Indian towns and Florida plantations. Slaves belonging to Floridians and the Seminoles were often stolen during the raids, and the angry slave owners retaliated with attacks against 30 the Georgians. The problems of the colonial government in East Florida escalated with the outbreak of the French Revolution and the ensuing European conflict. The struggle against Napoleon drained the Spanish government of resources, and her colonies in the Americas suffered as a result. Nevertheless, the threat of American or French attack against East Florida inspired the Spanish governor at St. Augustine to undertake improvements to the defenses of the city. The Spanish rebuilt the Cubo Line, widening the moat and lining the earthwork with palm logs. They also built a gate within the line, providing access to the city from the north. The renovations to the Cubo Line and the new City Gate, which replaced an earlier gate built around 1740, were 28 John C. Paige, Castillo de San Marcos: The British Years, , in Historic Structure Report for Castillo de San Marcos National Monument, Edwin C. Bearss and John C. Paige (Denver: National Park Service, 1983), Patricia C. Griffin, The Spanish Return: The People-Mix Period, , in The Oldest City: St. Augustine, Saga of Survival, ed. Jean Parker Waterbury (St. Augustine: St. Augustine Historical Society, 1983), Rembert W. Patrick, Florida Fiasco: Rampant Rebels on the Georgia-Florida Border, (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1954), 31.

22 THE STRUGGLE FOR FLORIDA AND CONSTRUCTION OF CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS, Figure 8. Reconstructed Cubo Line viewed from northwest, 1991 Figure 9. City Gate viewed from northwest, 1991 completed in 1808, and the residents of St. Augustine waited anxiously to see if and when an attack might come. 31 Florida had long been divided into two sections, west and east, with separate governors. West Florida contained the area west of the Apalachicola River to the Mississippi River, while the peninsula east of the Apalachicola comprised East Florida. It was in West Florida that the first threat to Spanish control emerged. The American government had claimed possession of West Florida following the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, but the Spanish refuted the American claim and retained control of the area. American citizens dominated the population of West Florida, however, and in 1810 they revolted against Spanish authority, meeting little resistance from the helpless Spanish government. The United States annexed the portion of West Florida west of the Perdido River the following year. 32 This bloodless revolution encouraged land-hungry Georgians, who hoped to oust Spain from the rest of Florida. A small group of planters with land in South Georgia and Florida organized in 1812 as the East Florida Patriots and declared their independence from Spain. With the backing of the United States military, the Patriots took the Spanish settlement at Femandina on Amelia Island and advanced to the old site of Fort Mose, north of St. Augustine. The Spanish governor at St. Augustine refused to surrender to the Patriots, however, and a stalemate ensued during the summer. Attacks by the Seminole allies of the Spanish forced the Americans to retreat, and the cause was lost when President James Madison withdrew his support for the rebe1s Ibid. 32 Ibid., Ibid.,

23 18 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY The primary impetus behind the Patriot Rebellion was greed for land and expansion of the American nation. Similar motives propelled the United States in 1812 to declare war on England, which controlled the northern part of the continent. Anxious to expand the nation s boundaries and rid its borders of foreign influence, expansionists utilized the violation of neutral rights by the English and dissatisfaction with Spanish rule in Florida to rally public support behind the War of 1812 and the Patriot Rebellion. Both conflicts were ill-conceived, however, and consequently the goal of expansion was not reached. The Treaty of Ghent, which ended the War of 1812, restored the pre-war boundaries of the United States, including the area of West Florida annexed in 1811; East Florida remained in Spanish hands. 34 The affirmation of Spanish control of East Florida in the Treaty of Ghent did not extinguish American desires for annexation of Florida. In 1817, just three years after the treaty was signed, President James Monroe authorized a campaign against the Seminole Indians, who were fighting with American settlers along the Georgia-Florida border. Monroe sent General Andrew. Jackson to drive the Seminoles back into Florida. While Jackson was not authorized to attack Spanish posts, he did so anyway, and by May 1818 he had conquered the Florida panhandle. While Jackson s forces never approached St. Augustine, the conquest of East Florida was a motivating force behind his campaign. 35 In the wake of American encroachments in Florida and revolutions against Spanish rule in Central and South America, the government in Spain finally acknowledged its inability to maintain possession of Florida. In 1821, Spain agreed to cede Florida to the United States in return for the retirement of Spanish debts owed American citizens. On July 10 of that year, ownership of Castillo de San Marcos transferred to the American government with appropriate fanfare, and the Spanish left the city of St. Augustine for the last time. 36 ASSOCIATED PROPERTIES Castillo de San Marcos and the moat, ravelin, covered way, glacis, Cubo Line, and City Gate are properties associated with the context, European Powers in Florida: The Construction of Castillo de San Marcos, All seven structures represent the struggle between European nations for control of North America over two-and-one-half centuries in Florida. Physical Characteristics Castillo de San Marcos is a bastioned masonry fortification located north of the colonial town of St. Augustine. The Castillo is built around a square plaza, the sides of which measure 320 feet, and has diamond-shaped bastions projecting outward at each corner. The coquina walls 34 Ibid., 144-5, Tindall and Shi, Ibid.,

24 THE STRUGGLE FOR FLORIDA AND CONSTRUCTION OF CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS, of the Castillo are thirty feet high, ten to fourteen feet thick at the base, and five feet thick at the top. Vaulted casemates support the wide terreplein, and embrasures at intervals along the top of the wall provided openings through which cannon could be fired. The moat, covered way, and glacis surround the Castillo on the north, west, and south sides. The moat originally encircled the fort on all sides, but the east side was filled with earth in 1842 to create a water battery. The remaining three sides of the moat are framed by coquina walls and contain water; the moat is approximately forty-two feet wide. The covered way is the flat, grassy area between the glacis and the moat; a masonry wall five feet high separates it from the glacis. The glacis is the open, sloped area beyond the covered way that stretches into the landscape. The ravelin is the triangular masonry structure built to afford additional protection to the corners of the bastions. The ravelin is located within the moat on the south side of the fort and is connected to the main structure by a reconstructed drawbridge. The Cubo Line begins at the covered way on the northwest side of the fort and proceeds 250 feet west toward the City Gate. The line is a reconstruction of the earthwork built in 1808 by the Spanish. The northern and southern faces of the defense work are concrete cast to imitate the palm logs of the original wall. Between the concrete walls is earthen infill, with a depth of forty-five feet. A dry moat exists along the north face of the Cubo Line. The City Gate of St. Augustine originally was part of the Cubo Line, providing entrance into the city from the north. Two four-foot-square coquina pillars frame an opening twelve feet wide. Each pillar has a cove-molded pyramidal cap with a round finial and a height of fourteen feet. On either side of the pillars, low stone walls thirty feet long by eleven feet wide extend to meet reconstructed portions of the Cubo Line. North of the gate, a coquina bridge spans a shallow moat. Associative Characteristics Castillo de San Marcos and the moat, covered way, glacis, ravelin, Cubo Line, and City Gate are closely associated with the struggle for domination of the New World by European powers. The Spanish built the Castillo and its related structures, the moat, covered way, glacis, and ravelin, to protect the colony at St. Augustine and Spanish interests along the eastern coast of North America. Throughout the periods of Spanish and English occupation of Florida, the Castillo was central to the defense of the colony from enemy forces. The Cubo Line originated during the eighteenth century, while the Castillo was still under construction. Following the English siege of St. Augustine in 1702, the Spanish government recognized the need for improved defenses for the city and undertook construction of defense works around the fort and town. The Cubo Line formed the innermost line of defense; north of the line, the hornwork and Fort Mose line provided additional barriers between the land approach to the city and the Castillo. The Cubo Line and the Rosario Line, another defense work, created the line of circumvallation that walled St. Augustine on the north, west, and south sides. Built of earth and wood, these outworks had short life spans in the subtropical Florida climate and were periodically reconstructed. The Spanish rebuilt the Cubo Line in 1808 and,

25 20 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY at the same time, built the City Gate to allow entrance into St. Augustine through the line. The Cubo Line and the City Gate are closely associated with the attempts to strengthen the defenses of the city during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Significance Castillo de San Marcos is nationally significant under National Register Criteria A and C. The Castillo represents the military struggle that occurred in Florida between the European powers, particularly Spain and England, for control of North America, It also illustrates the early diplomacy of the United States government, which culminated in the cession of Florida to the United States in Indeed, in many ways the Castillo represents the history of the nation from the time of the first permanent European settlement, through the struggle for empire between Spain and England, to the emergence of the American republic. The Castillo is also architecturally significant as the oldest masonry fortification remaining in the United States. Built using the bastion system of fortress construction popular in Europe, Castillo de San Marcos remains an important example of early military architecture in the United States. The moat, covered way, glacis, and ravelin are nationally significant structures under Criteria A and C. These four structures were integral to the protection of the Castillo and designed as significant elements of the city s defenses. As a result, they represent the battle for control of the eastern shores of North America by the European powers from the time of Florida s discovery to The structures are also architecturally significant, representing the military theories prevalent at the time of their construction and the execution of these European designs in the New World. Together with Castillo de San Marcos, the moat, covered way, glacis, and ravelin contribute to the understanding of the struggle for the Americas and the early military architecture that resulted from it. The Cubo Line and City Gate contribute to the significance of the district under Criteria A and C. The Cubo Line is an accurate reconstruction of the line as it appeared in 1808, when the Spanish rebuilt the structure and added the City Gate. The Cubo Line and City Gate represent early additions to the defenses of St. Augustine, and thus several centuries of struggle between European powers for control of Florida. As military fortifications, the Cubo Line and City Gate are typical designs for the period and thus have significance as early nineteenthcentury military structures. REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS/INTEGRITY Castillo de San Marcos National Monument was listed on the National Register in 1966, and documentation accepted in 1977 identified a district with three contributing historic structures, including the Castillo and the City Gate. Both the Castillo and the City Gate have retained integrity of location, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The Castillo has additionally retained integrity of setting. The setting of the City Gate has lost some integrity due to the construction of modern roadways that have physically separated it from the Castillo, but the eligibility of the structure has not been significantly diminished by the changes.

26 THE STRUGGLE FOR FLORIDA AND CONSTRUCTION OF CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS, The moat, covered way, glacis, and ravelin were included in the original nomination but not individually listed on the National Register. These are independent structures worthy of listing as contributing resources; each demonstrates integrity of location, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The moat was altered in the mid-nineteenth century when the east side was filled for construction of a water battery. This alteration changed the design of the structure but did not significantly impact its integrity. The covered way, glacis, and ravelin retain integrity of design. Reconstructions must demonstrate a high level of historical accuracy and integrity in order to be eligible for the National Register. The Criterion Considerations require that reconstructions be placed in appropriate settings as part of a master plan of restoration, in which no other structure with the same association remains. The Cubo Line meets all of these criteria. The reconstruction is built on the original location of the Cubo Line, which was identified through archeological investigation. No physical or archeological remains exist from the other outer defense works constructed at the same time as the Cubo Line. Therefore, the identification of the location of the original Cubo Line provided a unique opportunity for the reconstruction of a significant structure related to the long history of Castillo de San Marcos. The Cubo Line is an accurate reconstruction, exhibiting integrity of location, design, setting, feeling, and association. The line provides an important visual link between the Castillo and the City Gate, a link that had previously been absent and hindered interpretation of the City Gate at Castillo de San Marcos National Monument. While the reconstruction does not employ the original material, which was palm logs, the choice of concrete is justified both for its longer life span and by the careful casting of the concrete to simulate the appearance of palm logs. During the reconstruction, precautions were taken to protect the archeological remains of the original Cubo Line. The Cubo Line is thus eligible for the National Register due to the historical accuracy of the reconstruction and the lack of other structures with the same association around the fort. CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES Castillo de San Marcos ( ) Moat ( ) Covered way (1672-l762) Glacis ( ) Ravelin (1762) City Gate ( 1808) Cubo Line (1808; reconstructed 1963) NONCONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES None

27 CHAPTER THREE: THE UNITED STATES WAR DEPARTMENT AT FORT MARION, ESTABLISHING THE AMERICAN TERRITORY OF FLORIDA A ceremony held July 10, 1821, at Castillo de San Marcos officially marked the transfer of East Florida from Spain to the United States. Some Americans were unenthusiastic about acquisition of territory that U. S. Representative John Randolph described as a land of swamps, of quagmires, of frogs and alligators and mosquitoes. 37 Nevertheless, many other citizens, particularly in the South and West, viewed the removal of the Spanish from the east coast as essential to the prosperity and sovereignty of the nation. Supporters, including President James Monroe, also believed that acquisition of Florida would pacify the Seminole Indians and bring an end to attacks on white settlers. 38 The newly established territory united East and West Florida under one government, and Monroe appointed Andrew Jackson its first military governor. American farmers began to migrate into the territory soon after its acquisition, carving farms and plantations out of the fertile wilderness of north Florida. Other citizens moved into the territory s largest towns, St. Augustine and Pensacola, mingling with former Spanish citizens who remained in Florida under American rule. The United States Army established outposts throughout the territory; the garrison at St. Augustine occupied Castillo de San Marcos and several Spanish government buildings. In 1825, the War Department changed the name of the Castillo to Fort Marion, in honor of American Revolutionary War General Francis Marion. 39 The Spanish had limited expenditures on building maintenance and improvements during their final years of occupation because of funding shortages and uncertainty about the future of the colony. As a result, many of the public buildings and private residences in St. Augustine were in poor condition at the time of American occupation. At Fort Marion, cracks in the 37 Quoted in George E. Buker, The Americanization of St. Augustine, , in The Oldest City: St. Augustine, Saga of Survival, ed. Jean Parker Waterbury (St. Augustine: St. Augustine Historical Society, 1983), Ibid. 39 Ibid., 152: Arana, et al., 18

28 24 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT : HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY Figure 10. Plan of Castillo, 1821

29 THE UNITED STATES WAR DEPARTMENT AT FORT MARION, masonry walls, a crumbling water battery, and leaks in the terreplein were among the structural problems identified by American engineers. These problems made the fort uninhabitable; therefore, the St. Francis barracks, built during the British period to house soldiers, were repaired to house the garrison, and Fort Marion was used to store supplies and provisions. The 40 War Department also permitted local authorities to use several casemates as a prison. T HE SECOND SEMINOLE WAR, The belief that American occupation of Florida would provide security against warring Indian tribes helped gamer public support for the acquisition of Florida in It was soon clear, however, that fighting between the Seminoles and white settlers had continued unabated, and the government was forced to intervene in order to protect American lives and property. Negotiations in September 1823 resulted in the Treaty of Moultrie Creek, which established a four-million-acre reservation in the center of the Florida peninsula for the Seminole tribes. The treaty also required the government to provide money and supplies during the move and to 41 reimburse tribesmen for improvements on the land they were forced to abandon. The move to the reservation progressed slowly, but most tribes had relocated by Hunger soon forced the Indians off the reservation in search of food on neighboring farms; white settlers responded by petitioning the federal government for removal of the tribes to the West. In 1830 Congress passed the Indian Removal Act, which authorized the government to trade land west of the Mississippi River for Native American lands in the east and to assist in the removal of the tribes to their new homes. In the Treaty of Payne s Landing (1832) and the Treaty of Fort Gibson (1833), Seminole leaders agreed to removal, but soon after they reneged and declared both agreements invalid. Tensions mounted between the Indians and Americans, reaching a climax in December 1835 with the murder of the federal Indian agent and several others at Fort King and the ambush of an American detachment from Fort Brooke. 42 The Second Seminole War raged for seven years throughout the peninsula and ultimately resulted in the death or removal of virtually all Native Americans from Florida. St. Augustine became an important base of operations for the United States Army during the early stages of the war, and the population expanded with the influx of soldiers and refugees from neighboring plantations. While no skirmishes occurred in the city, attacks in outlying areas kept citizens on 40 Buker, 152: Edwin C. Bearss, "Castillo de San Marcos: The War Department Years, , in Historic Structure Report for Castillo de San Marcos National Monument, Edwin C. Bearss and John C. Paige (Denver: National Park Service, 1983), Buker, 161; John K. Mahon, History of the Second Seminole War, (Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press, 1985), Mahon, 5l-61, 72-83,

30 26 CASTILLO DE SAN MORCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT:HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY alert. Fort Marion continued to serve as a storehouse for weapons, supplies, and provisions for the army during this period. 43 The fort also served briefly as a prison for captured Seminole warriors. King Philip, Coacoochee, Blue Snake, Osceola, and Coa Hadjo were among the Indian leaders captured by American troops during the fall of Their loss weakened Seminole resistance, but the dramatic escape of Coacoochee and nineteen others from the fortress prison in November brought renewed vigor to the fight. Many of the prisoners who did not escape, including Osceola, were later sent to Fort Moultrie in South Carolina for safekeeping. 44 As the war progressed, the conflict moved farther south into the Everglades, but the superior strength of the Americans ultimately proved too much for the natives. In 1842, the Seminoles conceded defeat and loaded their belongings onto ships headed for their new homes west of the Mississippi. Approximately 4,000 Seminole Indians were either killed in the fighting or moved west at the conclusion of the war, leaving few Native Americans in Florida. The victory brought peace to Florida at a substantial cost: the Second Seminole War was the most expensive of the Indian wars, costing approximately $20 million dollars and 2,000 American lives. 45 FORT MARION AS A COASTAL FORTIFICATION Engineers and officials in the War Department did not view Fort Marion as essential to national defense prior to the Second Seminole War. Military engineers considered the fort a solid, defensible work, but they also believed the bastioned design of the fortress outdated. War Department officials observed that St. Augustine did not hold a position of strategic significance in Florida: the territorial capital moved to Tallahassee in 1824, and large ships found Matanzas Bay difficult to access. As a result, the War Department made few efforts to improve the fortress in the early years of occupation. Local citizens protested the Army s neglect in 1832, Figure 11. View of seawall from south, 1991 petitioning Congress to appropriate funds for repair 43 Sidney Walter Martin, Florida During the Territorial Days (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1944), Mahon, Ibid., 238; Albert Manucy, Some Military Affairs in Territorial Florida, Florida Historical Quarterly 25:2 (Oct. 1946), 210.

31 THE UNITED STATES WAR DEPARTMENT AT FORT MARION, Figure 12. View of hot shot furnace from south, Figure 13. View of water battery from south, of the fort and reconstruction of the city s seawall. Congress allocated $20,000 the same year to make needed repairs to the structures. 46 The seawall received top priority in the expenditure of funds because of a breach which threatened property and lives in town. The Army Corps of Engineers directed the reconstruction of the seawall over a period of fourteen years. The outbreak of the Second Seminole War forced the government to reevaluate the importance of Fort Marion within the coastal defense system, and additional expenditures for construction of a water battery were approved in Workers filled the moat between the east curtain wall and the seawall, building gun emplacements on the battery terreplein. They also built a hot shot furnace, which was used to heat iron cannon balls for firing at flammable targets like wooden ships. 47 The completion of the water battery and hot shot furnace in 1844 ended construction projects at Fort Marion. The fort s defenses were updated sufficiently to be included as part of the nation s coastal defense system. Like many of the contemporary fortifications along the American coastline, however, the fort lacked one ingredient key to its defense: a garrison to man its guns. When Confederate troops came to take over Fort Marion in 1861, they found only one elderly caretaker occupying the fortress. 48 FLORIDA IN THE CIVIL WAR, At the conclusion of the Second Seminole War in 1842, Florida began a gradual return to a peacetime economy. Farmers returned to their fields, and merchants resumed trade. Soldiers stationed in St. Augustine during the war were relocated to other posts around the country. Migration into the territory from the north continued, so that by 1845 Florida had sufficient 46 Bearss, 35, Bearss, : Albert Manucy, Artillery Through the Ages (Washington: National Park Service, 1949, reprint 1985), Arana, et al., 18-19

32 28 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY population to apply for statehood. 49 Congress accepted Iowa and Florida into statehood simultaneously, maintaining the balance between free and slave states in the Union. The need for such compromise illustrated the growing tension between the slave states of the South and the free states of the North, a tension that led to the secession of South Carolina in late On January 10, 1861, Florida followed suit and the next month became part of the newly formed Confederate States of America. 50 Throughout the South, secession governors ordered state troops to seize federally owned forts. In Florida, the governor sent state troops into Fort Marion, Fort Clinch, Fort Barrancas, and the Chattahoochee Arsenal five days before the formal act of secession by the legislature. Troops entered Fort Marion on January 7 and took the fortress from its solitary caretaker without a fight. At Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina, federal troops did not surrender to Confederate forces, and the siege on the fort in April 1861 signalled the beginning of the Civil War. 51 Florida contributed minimally to the war effort, both because of its limited supply of men and provisions and its location far south of the major theaters of the war. In St. Augustine, troops dismantled the guns at Fort Marion and shipped them to positions more important to the defense of the South. When Union gunboats appeared outside the harbor in March 1862, Confederate forces quickly departed the city; federal troops occupied St. Augustine on March 11 without confrontation. The Union forces upgraded Fort Marion to a state of defense, but the Confederacy made no attempt to reclaim the city for the duration of the war. 52 The federal occupation of the city continued after the Confederate surrender at Appomattox; troops assigned to Florida during Reconstruction were headquartered in St. Augustine. The strain of the war effort and the absence of winter tourists combined to deplete the town s resources, and recovery occurred slowly. Yet, by the 1870s, improvement was apparent: the local orange industry was rebounding, tourists were returning, and the first suburbs began to appear outside the old city walls. 53 F ORT MARION AND THE W ESTERN INDIAN W ARS As St. Augustine recovered from the Civil War, army engineers once again evaluated the importance of Fort Marion within the coastal defense system. In 1866, the War Department 49 Buker, Bearss, 255: Tindall and Shi, Bearss, 255-6: E. Merton Coulter, The Confederate States of America, vol. 7 of A History of the South (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1950), Coulter, 398: Bearss, Thomas Graham, The Flagler Era, , in, The Oldest City: St. Augustine, Saga of Survival, ed. Jean Parker Waterbury (St. Augustine: St. Augustine Historical Society, 1983),

33 THE UNITED STATES WAR DEPARTMENT AT FORT MARION, declared the fort nonessential to the nation s defenses but worthy of maintenance until further notice. The garrison stationed in St. Augustine made needed repairs to the fort and prepared it for possible use as a prison. 54 In the aftermath of the Civil War, the attention of the federal government shifted to the Great Plains, where the march of American settlers across the continent had continued virtually unabated throughout the war. The search for precious minerals and new agricultural lands drew miners from the west and farmers from the east toward the center of the continent. This new population of settlers not only infringed upon Indian lands but also threatened resources upon Figure 14. Fort Marion courtyard, C which the natives relied. While some tribes agreed to removal to new reservations, many others resisted, remembering the broken promises of the 1830s that had originally placed them on reservations. The Western Indian wars began in the early 1860s and continued through the 1880s. 55 In the course of the Indian campaigns, the army captured a number of rebellious natives for whom accommodations removed from the scene of battle were needed. Army officials chose Fort Marion, which had been used as a prison periodically from the time of the American Revolution, to house some of the captives. Seventy-one members of the Cheyenne, Kiowa, Comanche, Caddo, and Arapaho tribes arrived at the fort on May 21, Lt. Richard H. Pratt, who escorted the Indians to Florida, directed the construction of a wooden shed on the terreplein to house the prisoners. 56 Pratt attempted to educate and assimilate the Indians during the three years they were at Fort Marion, teaching them vocational skills as well as arithmetic, history, and English. He also encouraged them to make souvenirs to sell to tourists for spending money. When the prisoners were released by the War Department in 1878 to return home, a group of young men went to the Hampton Institute in Virginia to further their education and assimilation. Pratt s experience 54 Bearss, Tindall and Shi, Bearss,

34 30 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY with the Native American captives at Fort Marion led him to establish the Carlisle Indian Training School in Pennsylvania in Conflicts with the western tribes continued into the 1880s. In April 1886, a new group of prisoners arrived in St. Augustine from Arizona. The seventy-seven Apaches had surrendered to the army and were sent to Florida while the rest of the tribe was still at large. The Indians lived in army tents on the parade ground of the fort. By January 1887, the total number of prisoners at the fort was 447. As with the group that preceded them, the Apaches were educated in a special school, and tourists frequented the fort for a view of the men, women, and children. After a year of captivity in Florida, the prisoners were shipped to a reservation in Oklahoma. 58 Figure 15. Native American prisoners at Fort Marion, date unknown 57 Albert Manucy, Indian School at Fort Marion, chap. 16 in Great Men and Great Events in St. Augustine, Albert Manucy, Rhoda Emma Neel, and F. Hilton Crowe (National Park Service, 1939), Omega G. East, Apache Prisoners in Fort Marion, (National Park Service, 1951).

35 THE UNITED STATES WAR DEPARTMENT AT FORT MARI0N, FORT MARION NATIONAL MONUMENT St. Augustine was a popular tourist destination as early as 1830, attracting many northerners with its healthful climate and unique history. The tourism industry continued to grow until the Civil War, when travel between North and South became impossible. Recovery was slow after the war, until Henry M. Flagler, a cofounder of Standard Oil Company, began building his Florida resort dynasty in the 1880s. Flagler s vision of Florida as a rich man s paradise began in St. Augustine, where he opened several hotels catering to America s wealthy elite. 59 Two of the great attractions of St. Augustine were its European flavor and Spanish colonial architecture, and Fort Marion embodied both of those qualities. From the earliest days of American occupation, visitors to St. Augustine recognized the fort as one of the must-see sites in the city. The War Department began giving guided tours of the structure around 1848; tours were in such demand during the incarceration of the western Indians that special permits were required to gain access to the building. 60 The historical significance of Fort Marion was recognized by local citizens and War Department administrators early in the American period. In a letter requesting Congressional support for needed repairs to Figure 16. View of moat and east wall from south, 1991 the structure in 1832, a local citizen, Judge Robert R. Reid, referred to the fort as a fine and venerable monument of art worthy of preservation, and he considered the structure a source of pride to the local community. Military engineers assigned to work in St. Augustine often made similar observations about the strength of the fortress and its historic value to the city and the nation. 61 In 1884 Congress made the first appropriation for restoration of Fort Marion, which Jere Krakow, in the administrative history of Castillo de San Marcos and Fort Matanzas, describes as a particularly important step toward the structure s preservation: Of all the congressional actions, the most significant one occurred in 1884 when President Chester A. Arthur signed into law an appropriation of $5,000 for restoration and preservation of the Castillo. Preceding the Casa Grande 59 Graham, Jere L. Krakow, Administrative History of Castillo de San Marcos National Monument and Fort Matanzas National Monument (National Park Service, 1986), Bearss, 46-7: Krakow, 7.

36 32 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY preservation action by almost five years, it established a little known precedent for the expenditure of federal monies to preserve an historic structure. 62 Additional appropriations in 1888 and 1890 aided preservation efforts at the fort, and expenditures for restoration continued into the twentieth century. A disastrous fire in 1914 destroyed much of the downtown of St. Augustine, including the headquarters of the St. Augustine Historical Society and Institute of Science. Searching for a place to house its collections, the society applied to the War Department for use of several casemates at Fort Marion. Under terms of an agreement reached the same year, the Historical Society provided guided tours of the fort for ten cents per person and ran a gift shop selling postcards and other souvenirs. The War Figure 17. View of moat, covered way, and Department reserved the right to ensure building glacis from east, 1995 maintenance and access to visitors as well as quality of guide service. This arrangement would continue, with modifications, until the National Park Service assumed responsibility for the fort in In 1924, President Calvin Coolidge, acting under the authority of the Antiquities Act of 1906, declared five forts, including Fort Marion and another Spanish colonial fortification, Fort Matanzas, to be national monuments. This action officially established a government policy of preservation for the two structures. The War Department continued to administer the two forts until 1933, when Franklin D. Roosevelt signed an executive order transferring national monuments, military parks, battlefields, and cemeteries to the National Park Service in the Department of the Interior. 64 A SSOCIATED PROPERTIES Castillo de San Marcos and the moat, ravelin, covered way, glacis, water battery, hot shot furnace, and seawall are properties associated with the context, The United States War Department at Fort Marion, All eight structures represent the continued use of the fort as a defensive structure throughout the nineteenth century; they also illustrate advances in military architecture and technology that eventually made the fort obsolete. 62 Krakow, Ihid., Ibid., 23-4, 39.

37 THE UNITED STATES WAR DEPARTMENT AT FORT MARION, Physical Characteristics Castillo de San Marcos is a bastioned masonry fortification located north of the colonial town of St. Augustine. The Castillo is built around a square plaza, the sides of which measure 320 feet, and has diamond-shaped bastions projecting outward at each comer. The coquina walls of the Castillo are thirty feet high, ten to fourteen feet thick at the base, and five feet thick at the top. Vaulted casemates support the wide terreplein, and embrasures at intervals along the top of the wall provided openings through which cannon could be fired. The moat, covered way, and glacis surround the Castillo on the north, west, and south sides. The moat originally encircled the fort on all sides, but the east side was filled in 1842 to create a water battery. The remaining three sides of the moat are framed by coquina walls and contain water; the moat is approximately forty-two feet wide. The covered way is the flat, grassy area between the glacis and the moat; a masonry wall five feet high separates it from the glacis. The glacis is the open, sloped area beyond the covered way that stretches into the landscape. The ravelin is the triangular masonry structure built to afford additional protection to the comers of the bastions. The ravelin is located within the moat on the south side of the fort and is connected to the main structure by a reconstructed drawbridge. The water battery comprises the east side of Castillo de San Marcos between the curtain wall and the seawall. This area was infilled by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers between 1842 and 1844 to permit the placement of guns facing the harbor. The water battery is constructed of earth and coquina stone. The seawall protects the fort from the waters of Matanzas Bay. Originally built by the Spanish, the seawall was substantially reconstructed by the Army Corps of Engineers between 1833 and The coquina structure is faced with granite to the high water mark. The hot shot furnace was built in 1844 on top of the water battery. The stuccoed coquina furnace measures nine feet long and eight feet wide, and the chimney is eleven feet high. Associative Characteristics Castillo de San Marcos and the moat, covered way, glacis, ravelin, water battery, seawall, and hot shot furnace are closely associated with the continued use of a colonial fortification by the United States Army into the twentieth century. The Castillo served as a military base of operations during the Second Seminole War and the American Civil War. The structure also served as a prison during the Second Seminole War and the Western Indian wars of and The moat, covered way, glacis, and ravelin are all structures closely associated with the defense of the fort and contributed to its ability to remain a part of the coastal defense system during the nineteenth century. The Castillo and its associated structures were also a significant part of the development of tourism in St. Augustine, and their preservation marks early commitment by the U. S. government to the preservation of historic structures under its management. The seawall, water battery, and hot shot furnace were built between 1833 and 1844 in an attempt to update the Castillo and make it a contributing part of the nineteenth century coastal

38 34 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY defense system. The reconstruction of the seawall by the Army was necessary to protect the fort and the city from erosion and storms and to permit the construction of the water battery. The water battery and hot shot furnace originated as a result of the Second Seminole War and national attempts to prepare the coastline in the event of a naval attack. As such, they represent the military thinking prevalent at the time of their construction. They complement the Castillo, demonstrating the evolution of military engineering and technology. Significance Castillo de San Marcos and the moat, covered way, glacis, and ravelin are nationally significant under National Register Criteria A and C. All of these structures were significant during the Second Seminole War, when the fort served as a base of operations for the United States Army against the Seminoles. The structures also played a minor role in the Civil War and the coastal defense system developed by the Army Corps of Engineers during the nineteenth century. During the twentieth century, the Castillo and its associated structures gained additional significance as recipients of federal funding for their preservation. The structures were also contributing factors to tourism development in Florida at the end of the nineteenth century. The seawall, water battery and hot shot furnace also contribute to the significance of the district under National Register Criteria A and C. The three structures were built in the midnineteenth century in order to update the defenses of Castillo de San Marcos, then known as Fort Marion, The reconstruction of the seawall by the Army Corps of Engineers was necessary to insure the safety of the town and fort from high waters and erosion. The construction of the water battery and hot shot furnace was primarily a response to the Second Seminole War and was also a part of the development of the nineteenth century coastal defense system. The structures are significant examples of the military and engineering conventions of their day. REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS/INTEGRITY Castillo de San Marcos National Monument was listed on the National Register in 1966, and documentation accepted in 1977 identified a district with three contributing historic structures, including the Castillo and the water battery. Both the Castillo and the water battery have retained integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The moat, covered way, glacis, ravelin, seawall, and hot shot furnace were included in the original nomination but not individually listed on the National Register. These are independent structures worthy of listing as contributing resources, demonstrating integrity of location, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The covered way, glacis, ravelin, seawall, and hot shot furnace also retain integrity of design. The moat was altered for construction of the water battery, but the change in design did not significantly impact its integrity.

39 THE UNITED STATES WAR DEPARTMENT AT FORT MARION, CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES Castillo de San Marcos (1672-l756) Moat ( ) Covered way ( ) Glacis ( ) Ravelin (1762) Water battery (1842) Seawall (1833-l 842) Hot shot furnace (1842) NONCONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES None

40 CHAPTER FOUR: MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The Cultural Resources Team of the Southeast Region offers the following management recommendations to assist resource managers in identifying areas for further research, expanding existing interpretive programs, and maintaining records related to historic cultural resources. We provide some preliminary recommendations for the management and treatment of cultural resources that should be incorporated into the park s Resource Management Plan (RMP). The List of Classified Structures (LCS) inventory for CASA previously included three structures, all of which are listed on the National Register. The LCS update added eight properties to the list, seven of which are eligible for the National Register. The ineligible structure is a nonhistoric commemorative marker placed in honor of the Castillo s tricentennial in Although the Tricentennial Marker fails to satisfy the National Register s fifty-year requirement, it is managed as a cultural resource. Existing National Register documentation for CASA included Castillo de San Marcos, the water battery, and the City Gate as contributing features. The revised National Register documentation prepared by the LCS team adds the moat, covered way, glacis, ravelin, seawall, and hot shot furnace as contributing structures within the district. It also provides a more fully developed contextual history of Castillo de San Marcos and the other contributing structures. The resources at CASA are well documented through two Historic Structure Reports, numerous special history studies, journal articles, and archeological reports. These studies and reports cover virtually all aspects of the Castillo s long history with a great deal of detail. A number of reports have also been written concerning the structural stability of the Castillo, an ongoing concern for park management. The 1996 RMP called for the development of a stabilization strategy and a historic structure preservation guide for the Castillo. It also calls for routine removal of vegetation from the coquina walls of the fort and related structures. The park should continue to pursue such projects in order to ensure the structural stability of the monument into the future. Park management has additionally identified a need for a Cultural Landscape Report (CLR) at Castillo de San Marcos. A CLR would aid park interpretation by providing information on the historic appearance of the fort s grounds and making possible a restoration or recreation of the historic scene. Furthermore, a CLR might identify landscape features (e.g., sidewalks,

41 38 CASTILLLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY retaining walls) dating from the War Department era of the park s history. Such features would be potentially eligible for the National Register. Park structure files should be maintained that record any activity to LCS properties and also serve as central repositories for historical documentation. Historic and nonhistoric photographs, maps, and documents should be catalogued and appropriately stored. Ongoing efforts to organize the park archives and library should continue to ensure the preservation of these important resources.

42 BIBLIOGRAPHY Arana, Luis. Governor Cendoya s Negotiation in Mexico for a Stone Fort in St. Augustine. El Escribano 7 (Oct. 1970): , David C. Dutcher, George M. Strock, and F. Ross Holland. Castillo de San Marcos and Fort Matanzas National Monuments, Florida: Historical Research Management Plan. National Park Service, 1967., and Albert Manucy. The Building of Castillo de San Marcos. Eastern National Park and Monument Association Bearss, Edwin C., and John C. Paige. Historic Structure Report for Castillo de San Marcos National Monument. Denver: National Park Service, Chatelain, Verne E. The Defenses of Spanish Florida, Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington, Coulter, E. Merton. The Confederate States of America. Vol. 7 of A History of the South. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, Duffy, Christopher. The Fortress in the Age of Vauban and Frederick the Great, Vol. 2 of Siege Warfare. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, East, Omega G. Apache Prisoners in Fort Marion, National Park Service, Frazier, C. Craig, Randall Copeland, and Luis Arana. Historic Structure Report, Castillo de San Marcos National Monument. National Park Service, Krakow, Jere L. Administrative History of Castillo de San Marcos National Monument and Fort Matanzas National Monument. National Park Service, Mahon, John K. History of the Second Seminole War, Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press, Manucy, Albert. Artillery Through the Ages. Washington: National Park Service, Reprint, Washington: National Park Service, Florida s Menéndez: Captain General of the Ocean Sea. St. Augustine: St. Augustine Historical Society, 1965.

43 40 CASTILLO DE SANMARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY. Some Military Affairs in Territorial Florida. Florida Historical Quarterly 25 : 2 (Oct. 1946): , ed. A History of Castillo de San Marcos and Fort Matanzas from Contemporary Narratives and Letters. Washington, DC: National Park Service, 1943., and Alberta Johnson. Fort Marion and the War of Independence. St. Augustine: National Park Service, Southeastern National Monuments, 1941., Rhoda Emma Neel, and F. Hilton Crowe. Great Men and Great Events in St. Augustine. National Park Service, Martin, Sidney Walter. Florida During the Territorial Days. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, Muller, John. A Treatise Containing the Elementary Part of Fortification, Regular and Irregular Reprint, Ottawa: Museum Restoration Service, Patrick Rembert W. Florida Fiasco: Rampant Rebels on the Georgia-Florida Border, Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, Tindall, George B., and David E. Shi. America: A Narrative History. 2d ed. New York: W. W. Norton and Co., Waterbury, Jean Parker, ed. The Oldest City: St. Augustine, Saga of Survival. St. Augustine: St. Augustine Historical Society, 1983.

44 APPENDIX A: DESCRIPTIONS OF HISTORIC RESOURCES Castillo de San Marcos, : A bastioned masonry fortification located north of the colonial city of St. Augustine, the Castillo centers on a square plaza, the sides of which measure 320 feet. Diamond-shaped bastions project outward from each corner of the fortress; each bastion has a sentry box at its point, The coquina walls of the Castillo are thirty feet high, ten to fourteen feet thick at the base, and five feet thick at the top. Vaulted casemated support the wide terreplein, and embrasures at intervals along the top of the wall provided openings through which cannon could be fired. The entrance to the fort, or sally port, is located in the south curtain wall and accessed by a reconstructed drawbridge. (building; IDLCS 00129) Moat, : A coquina-lined ditch approximately forty-two feet wide surrounds the Castillo on the north, west, and south. The ditch contains a small amount of water. Originally constructed to encircle the fort on all sides, the moat was filled on the east side in 1842 to create the water battery. (structure; IDLCS 91415) Ravelin, 1762: A roughly triangular masonry structure located within the moat on the south side of the Castillo. The ravelin was built to afford additional protection to the corners of the bastions and to protect the sally port. It is connected to the main structure by a reconstructed drawbridge. (structure; IDLCS 91418) Covered way, : The flat, grassy area between the moat and the glacis on the north, west, and south sides of the Castillo is separated from the glacis by a masonry retaining wall five feet high. (structure; IDLCS 91416) Glacis, : The open, sloped area beyond the covered way that stretches from the fort into the landscape on the north, west, and south sides of the Castillo. The glacis was historically kept clear of trees and other obstructions in order to maintain a clear line of vision for the fort s defenders. (structure; IDLCS 91417) City Gate, 1808: Two four-foot-square coquina pillars frame an opening twelve feet wide. Each pillar has a covemolded pyramidal cap with a round finial and a height of fourteen feet. On either side of the pillars, low stone walls thirty feet long by eleven feet wide extend to meet reconstructed portions of the Cubo Line. North of the gate, a coquina bridge spans a shallow moat. The City Gate was originally part of the Cubo Line and provided entrance to the city of St. Augustine from the north. (structure; IDLCS 00131) Cubo Line, 1808, reconstructed 1963: A reconstruction of the earth and log structure built by the Spanish in 1808, the Cubo Line extends from the covered way on the northwest side of the fort and proceeds 250 feet west toward the City Gate. The northern and southern faces of the defense work are concrete cast to imitate the palm logs of the original wall. Between the

45 A-2 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY concrete walls is earthen infill with a depth of forty-five feet. A dry moat exists along the north face of the Cubo Line. (structure; IDLCS 90100) Seawall, : Coquina structure faced with granite to the high water mark, the seawall protects the fort from the waters of Matanzas Bay. The original Spanish seawall was substantially reconstructed by the Army Corps of Engineers between 1833 and (structure; IDLCS 91421) Water battery, 1842: The earth and coquina structure comprises the east side of the Castillo de San Marcos, between the curtain wall and the seawall. The water battery was built on top of the east side of the moat by the Army Corps of Engineers between 1842 and 1844 to permit placement of guns facing the harbor. (structure; IDLCS 07174) Hot shot furnace, 1842: Stuccoed coquina furnace measuring nine feet long by eight feet wide has a chimney eleven feet high on the south end. Small arched openings with lintels provide access to the interior of the furnace on the south and north ends. The exterior of the structure is marked with iron crossties on all sides. The hot shot furnace sits on top of the water battery on the east side of the fort. (structure; IDLCS 91419)

46 B-3 CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS NATIONAL MONUMENT: HISTORIC RESOURCE STUDY Castillo de San Marcos National Monument Historical Base Map

47 APPENDIX C: NATIONAL REGISTER DOCUMENTATION

48 NPS Form (Rev ) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES REGISTRATION FORM OMB No